LETTERs

Red tape is a money spinner I'm sure neither MA's legal editor Peter Coulson, nor Association of Licensed Multiple Retailers chief executive Nick Bish (who used to be employed in the division I headed at the old Courage Brewery) are naive, but they have overlooked the primary factor driving and protecting red tape in licensing. Since the transfer of jurisdiction from magistrates courts to councils, basic licensing fees have increased disproportionately. The minimum cost of a premises licence over three years is now £240 whilst under the old regime it was £30. That is an 800% increase and the average is much larger. Whatever they say, this legislation has been as much a financial bonanza for councils and their employees as it has a financial penalty for licensees. Councils now have a strong vested interest in protecting and expanding this lucrative revenue earner. As a councillor, I am aware that such vested interests are very strong. That is why cutting the red tape is, and will continue to be, such an uphill struggle. Cllr John M Gover London Borough of Waltham Forest

Camra full pint call is folly Further to my comments in last week's Guv'nor column, I would like to expand on some of my points regarding the Campaign for Real Ale's, renewed, ill-judged campaign for a full pint. I am the landlord of 12 years' standing of a real-ale pub in the heart of Yorkshire and we use unlined, brim-fill pint glasses. We only have to look at the recent past to see the folly of allowing politicians to get involved in the way pubs are run. From the Beer Orders of 1989, through the restructuring of the licensing laws to the debacle that will be the smoking ban, politicians have never been able to successfully legislate for the licensed trade, for the simple reason that, with a few exceptions, they don't frequent pubs. Unfortunately, the Camra campaign will play right into the hands of both the Government and a European dislike of the pint. What we have in the UK is a unique brewing heritage that produces some of the finest ales in the world, an excellent dispense system for this wonderful product and, most importantly of all, the traditional pint glass. Be it a schooner, a nonic or any other shape, it's the unlined, brim-fill glass we are all familiar with and it is the future. Unfortunately, the pub trade, because of the incompetence of government, is dominated by pubcos. They now hold enormous sway over what happens within the trade. With the existing system of drink measuring, the drinker has a choice as to how their pint is poured. The key is the glass. With a brimful glass whatever ratio of liquid to head is desired, we can dispense it. If you introduce the lined glass, the choice has gone. A lined glass achieves two goals that you may regret. The price of beer will go up by a minimum of 5%. The real rise will be determined by the monitoring companies used by the pubcos. More importantly, choice will completely disappear. While you may now feel short changed by the head of a beer, scarily, what you see will be what you get with a lined glass. And the real dangers of the campaign? I remember why Camra came to be: appalling beer served in an electric half-pint measure. So now, to give complete control over the dispense of a pint to pubcos through lobbying government seems complete folly. The current glass gives the consumer a choice. A lined glass takes all that choice away and we will return to the electric half-pint dispense. A successful Camra campaign means lined glasses will lose money for pubcos. Pubcos will embrace the spirit of the lined glass and will introduce dispense systems that dispense "a pint". Real ale, because of the nature of the beast, will not be acceptable and will decline. These are no empty forecasts - shareholders dictate. John Baldwin Landlord, the Big Six, Halifax, Yorkshire